Poll: New Combat Outcome

[al_thor]

After considerable play, I find that I have thought about this on several occasions. I like the idea.

 

[Head Serf]

Could you explain yourself a little better?

 

[al_thor]

Well, what are the outcomes now?
1. Attacking unit dies
2. Defending Units dies
3. Attacking unit retreats (obviously limited to certain unit types)

But what if they BOTH died? Like if 2 Swords were battling it out and they both land fatal hits? Sure, it's not LIKELY, and that's why it would be a (very) small chance, but a chance nonetheless.

 

[MrCynical]

We aren't talking about single people though, and it seems implausible that two groups of soldiers would completely eradicate each other. I suppose you could regard it as a Pyrrhic victory where the winning unit has so few men left that it cannot reform, but I don't think this really feels right as an idea.

 

[Steve2000]

Don't like it. This is what hitpoints are for. A double loss is when one unit wins, but is so badly damaged it is likely to be killed in the next battle unless you can get it safely away.

 

[flytyer]

no, this would suck.

 

[Sidewinder00Q]

How about a better option. Both Units survive.

Obviously not an option when Defending a City, but when engaging out in the open the Defender should have the ability to withdraw/rout.

 

[A+ombomb]

I like the both units survive better. I like having more rounds to make combat more balanced even better.

 

[Ranos]

How about a better option. Both Units survive.

Obviously not an option when Defending a City, but when engaging out in the open the Defender should have the ability to withdraw/rout.

Ever heard of the Flanking promotion? What about the natural withdrawal of all mounted and armored units? Oh yeah, Submarines and siege units too.

Combat is fine the way it is. There is always victory for one side, anything else is just plain ridiculous.

 

[civ=braincandy]

what would be better is if both units would deal considerable damage and it would end in a stalemate then the civ who had faster healing bonuses could regroup and fight the next turn and have the edge

 

[Sidewinder00Q]

Ever heard of the Flanking promotion? What about the natural withdrawal of all mounted and armored units? Oh yeah, Submarines and siege units too.

Combat is fine the way it is. There is always victory for one side, anything else is just plain ridiculous.

Flanking Promotion only works when your attacking. It has no effect on Defending units. You can say that, but when the Combat system allows a crippled but highly promoted unit to defend when theres a better defensive option, you start to wonder why you are playing the game.

 

[J_RocKeT76]

No dont like it. Would hate to be trying to capture a city and have my last attacker and AIs last defender both die. City undefended and I have to mount another attack. By that time the AI has redefended, or the barbs have taken it, or that one AI (Monte, Alex) that is really p---ing you off in your game wiil capture it.

 

[Thalassicus]

You can say that, but when the Combat system allows a crippled but highly promoted unit to defend when theres a better defensive option, you start to wonder why you are playing the game.

The answer to that is Designated Defenders. I have no clue why they left this out of Civ IV, unless it was just an oversight. It's more important now, since you have an attacker/defender unit and promotion system in place. Level 5 City Raider Swordsmen should only defend an army in a last resort when there's Level 2 Combat I axemen available in the stack. In prior versions of Civ, Designated Defender-marked units are always chosen to defend over other units in a stack.

 

[synthboy]

The option to chose which unit will defend an attack would be a great idea. You could have an option that always defaulted to the AI selction for those players who wish toavoid micro-management. I'm guessing nobody considered the idea of cannon fodder when designing this game.